> Roughly. FHM (did I uh spell that right?) and Maxim, too, but I think
> there are less obvious examples that don't occur to me right now. On
> the other side, Cosmo and fashion magazines are the obvious subjects,
> but there are also the more domestic ones too.
Oh, right. It's been sometime since I've perused a copy of FHM or Maxim when I was bored at the grocery store or airport.
> Guys like boobs. _Nature_ has the paper in review as we speak.
Most guys. Of course, what guys like widely varies according to the individual.
> You can play similar games with catalogs. The models in the outdoors
> catalogs are definitely tuned to appeal to me, like they're not afraid
> to sweat and get a little grubby. But what's also interesting is that
> sometimes they'll throw in somebody who I guess is supposed to be
> "plain", not ugly, but not somebody who you would expect to make it as
> a model.
L.L. Bean porn?
> On a similar note, has anybody else seen the Suicide Girls? I saw a
> DVD of them and I confess I didn't really get the point. Like it was
> supposed to be this big "tear down beauty standards" thing, and they
> had a bunch of slimmer-than-average 20-somethings with tats and
> piercings. Very hipster, hee hee.
I've seen several of their cable programs thanks to my pet-sitting gigs that gave me access to cable.
That aesthetic would have appealed to me more 20 years ago, although punk girls back in the 1980s didn't have tattoos for the most part. I do know many young women who match the Suicide Girls look, but that look, especially tattoos, are a turnoff for me.
Chuck